Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hulksmash wrote:

Tomb King wrote:You can beat it but its going to be a boring game and you might have to tailor to that build. You can build a list to beat grey knights but then get stomped by half the other armies out there. That is why they are overpowered. The amount of competitive builds in the GK book is more then any other codex. sigh... why bother this is like trying to convince someone that has an inability to comprehend the big picture.

I entirely disagree with you. A true take all comers list should for a start be able to deal with:

-DE Venom Spam
-Razor Spam
-DoA
-All Terminator Armies (ala Deathwing)
-AV12/13 spam
-Horde
-T6 Spam

Any list I build that can handle all those styles of list (and I can build one out of every codex outside of Eldar and that's just due to my lack of experience with Eldar) can handle any "competitive" gk build. Don't blame a book for an inability to build a proper take all comers list.

Also the idea that people can't see a larger picture because they don't agree with you is misguided and comes off arrogant. Is it possible that maybe you don't quite understand the balance of the game and that brings you to the conclusion that GK are broken?

I stand by that GK aren't broken. I also don't expect to see them dominating the Tourney scene this year anything like the Orks did in 2008-2009.

I beat grey knights just fine. Its just the means to do so isnt really too much fun and if I end up facing someone non grey knights and they get curb stomped by the list ment to compete with grey knights then I feel like an ass even further. I have been playing a lot with lower tier armies lately. I find them more fun and an actual challenge to win with rather then the top tier armies that have a paved road.

I entirely disagree with you. A true take all comers list should for a start be able to deal with:

-DE Venom Spam
-Razor Spam
-DoA
-All Terminator Armies (ala Deathwing)
-AV12/13 spam
-Horde
-T6 Spam

Any list I build that can handle all those styles of list (and I can build one out of every codex outside of Eldar and that's just due to my lack of experience with Eldar) can handle any "competitive" gk build. Don't blame a book for an inability to build a proper take all comers list.

I call shenanigans. Weapons that are good versus venom spam are not good versus av13 spam for example. I think you have confused having a tool to deal with something in your army from handling that army.

For example, since you say you can do this with every army, how do your orks deal with venom spam while also dealing with DoA? Dealing with an army means that you should beat them with an opponent of equal skill more than half the time. Hulk methinks you are leveraging your player skill into the equasion, which colors your perception.

Now, there is an army that can deal with any army build and still win over half the time. They are the Grey Knights. They, and they alone, have the tools in a single list to beat any army with more than a 50% win chance provided player skill is the same.

@Devian

I might indeed be leveraging in player skill and that does color perception admittedly. But I see that skill as being attainable by anyone who plays in 40+ tournament games a year

As for my Orks vs. DoA and Venom Spam the tools in my (and by my I mean a base list I stole from MVB and tweaked to my style) work well for both. I'll pm you my list and how I would handle it as I don't want to clutter the thread up with it as it doesn't relate to the topic. But Wagons, Trukks, Buggies, and Kanz feature prominantly

Honestly I've found GK's relatively one dimensional with fewer targets on the field for me worry about.

Hulksmash wrote:

Honestly I've found GK's relatively one dimensional with fewer targets on the field for me worry about.

No wai, they have to be at least 3-D models to be able to stand up by themselves!

In all seriousness, I think many prominent builds by GK (draigowing/purifier spam/Henchmen spam) can be rather short sighted or one dimensional but I think a good balanced/mixed GK army with a bit of everything really has a lot to offer and is really fun to play. Its just that their points costs are so prohibitive hehe. If GK cost as much as SW/IG then we'd have an OP army but because everything is so expensive to begin with, I think they are rather tame, with a few exceptions.

I play primarily henchmen and razorspam, with teleporting Dreadknights as my heavy support, so my perspective comes from that. What I have found is that GK wins the Razorspam battle, but falls short against less trendy tournament builds out there. As such, they are certainly a lot for the favored SW list of our area (longwang razorspam) to take head on, but blobed up guard armies or even infantry heavy MEQs? Not so much. Until basic SM hamminators get a price adjustment they are not even in the running for top three HtH armies out there.

They have a lot of interesting advantages against a couple of specific armies (most notable Orks, Blood Angels, Templars), some interesting weaknesses (many variations of IG, Eldar), and horribly wreck a couple of the weaker books (Nids and Daemons). This is pretty much what the other regular tournament goers I often confer with have been seeing, as well. This puts them in the solid number three spot of codexes and the actual tournament data is reflecting that.

I maintain that people who relentlessly cry OP (and relentlessly refuse to accept that the tangible date shows otherwise) need to update their armies to reflect the newer metagame and get some more playtesting in.

I wonder if the GK anti-daemon rules weren't written with the idea that all 1-wound daemon units would be getting the old sustained assault special rule. Then the rule didn't materialize, but the anti-daemon rules still stuck.

The book is no more OP than the other top codices out there. The only problems I really have with the codex are DCA's costing less than their gear costs in any other other army that can buy it, and 85pt grenade boat Inquisitors. Psy dreads are a pain and a little under costed, but then again so are Long Fangs. Pally death stars are tough, and probably one of the top D Star units. However the points costs reflect this, so no foul there. Now when you get down to 15pt models that come with 30pts of war gear (crusaders) or 10 pts of wargear and space elf stats (assasins) you have balancing issues. Paying 85pts for a 3w power armored psyker chucking 4 grenades per combat that can/will cripple an enemy unit is also a bit much. Aside from those two instances of complete and utter fail, the book is just another top tier army IMO.

There is a laundry list and it has already been spewed out too many times to repeat why they are OP, but for me I think the simplest issue with that whole book are the two special characters that allow FOC changes. This has gotten out of hand in the last few MEQ builds and none more so then Grey Knights. Paladins and purifiers should not be be troops, period. Play a friendly tournie that disallows special characters and you will see my point. Across the board games play better. Codex space marines is mostly to blame for this trend I fear but at least their characters don't alter the chart.

Red Corsair wrote:There is a laundry list and it has already been spewed out too many times to repeat why they are OP, but for me I think the simplest issue with that whole book are the two special characters that allow FOC changes. This has gotten out of hand in the last few MEQ builds and none more so then Grey Knights. Paladins and purifiers should not be be troops, period. Play a friendly tournie that disallows special characters and you will see my point. Across the board games play better. Codex space marines is mostly to blame for this trend I fear but at least their characters don't alter the chart.

By friendly tournament I take it you mean comp friendly or fluff bunny? So would you still think GK were overpowered if they took a generic Grand Master, made Paladins scoring via grand strategy and took some Strike Squads for troops and commenced the face wreckage?

No offense but force org changes do not make an army overpowered (and definitely not the ones that GK allow), just more fun . These things are nothing new, anyway, consider Craftworld:Eldar that had force org changes and so on. I personally think it adds flavor and theme to armies.

7th ed fantasy daemons were meaningfully above the power level of their peers and this fact was clearly represented in tourney results.

If GK are so overpowered, why do we not see the same thing?


(If your answer is top players haven't switched to GK yet, then you've already proven GK aren't overpowered. If any army is overpowered, a player of lesser skill should be able to beat a person of greater skill. If the more skilled person is winning, then they army isn't too strong).


EDIT: I wanted to clarify that this doesn't mean they are not strong or not the strongest 40K army. They just aren't meaningfully above the curve that people need to complain incessantly.

Re: Force Org changing HQs
Coteaz is not an issue for the henchmen thing. If he did not do that I would still take him every time for the seize reroll and all the other stuff he brings to the table for his cost. The Crow Tax is fairly meaningless because, as Mortvie pointed out, its more efficient to simply take a grand master and make some of the purifiers scoring. The real issue with purifiers is that they are undercosted when focused on a single role (shooting or CC) and cleansing flame is off the hook broken against xenos armies. If force org swaps were the root of all evil then Loganwing, Dante Sanguinary Guard, and DE Duke lists should show up on the radar for tournament wins, but that has not been the case. When something seems overpowered because of a force org shift, its usually the units that are at the root of it, not the different slot.

As for henchmen pricing, the only one that is really undercosted is the Crusader, who should cost around 22 points, given his statline and gear. The DCAs are pretty much on target for a T3 model with that save, they just seem really good because they are exceptionally descent MEQ killers; against Xenos armies (or anything with a Coward Shield) they are not so hot. Besides, its the grenades that make this unit what it is. The Psycho grenades probably should have been confined to just the HQ units and not Tech Marines and the "Its all a Joke" result should have made the unit affected fearless so that it is not such an I win button against non-MEQ armies. This is all Matt Ward forgetting that people play something other than Space Marines again.....

blah,,blah,,,blah,,,

I hope in a few months the TAU will have a OP codex.

thevirus wrote:blah,,blah,,,blah,,,

I hope in a few months the TAU will have a OP codex.

What? Tau are brokenly good now. No more goodies for the greater good they have gotten fat already. j/k

Im with you on that. Im somehow undefeated with my tau but it is a hard streak to keep and they havent faced IG, SW, or GK yet.

While GK's may not be overpowered, GK's certainly are the strongest book out there. People talk about their survivability, but guess what... marines have it! Between power armor and cover saves, they are as survivable as any other marine army in the game. However, while they are surviving at an equally rate, they put out more firepower and h2h ability than any comparable model for the points. That's what makes them so frickin good. What kills infantry units from shooting? Forcing them to take lots and lots of armor saves, which is what GK's excel at.

The lack of long-range shooting is often brought up, but what GK's do have is capacity to ignore 1/3rd of the vehicle chart. That lack of long-range shooting is made up by having fantastic medium and short range. By having transports which can get the troops into position more reliably than any other army's, they overcome the quasi-lack of long range punch.

That's before psybolt autocannon dreads enter the discussion. Reliable s8 shooting, in a vehicle format that ignores 1/3rd of the damage chart is a fantastic investment for the points. Them dreds are the best in the game, hands down.

SW and IG are absolutely top notch books which can certainly hang with the GKs but I just don't see how anyone can say GK's aren't the best army around (especially purifier spam which is insanely good). OP? Maybe. Best out? Absolutely.

edit: forgot about their anti-tank. They have oodles of s8, rending and melta so they have anti-tank from every range in the game.

How can anyone say they are not the best? You mean aside from the actual results of all the tournaments last year? I swear its like having a theological debate....

Anyhow, as to survivability, they are not really any better than any other MEQ book out there, in fact they are probably worse due to either having lower numbers or a reliance on T3 5+ save guys. The dreadknight is certainly among the toughest MCs out there and Paladins can be extremely tough at their huge pricetag, but equal points of Ravenwing Terms with an apothicary are much harder to take down (and fearless). Plague marines are much harder to kill than any GK power armor selection for comparable costs. Both Plague Marines and any other MEQ with access to FnP is much more resistant to light shooting than the GKs. There are good arguments for calling them one of the best armies out there, but survivability is not really one of them.

THIS THREAD NEEDS A POLL! LET THE RESULTS SPEAK FOR THE MASSES!

You heard it here, OP. Dakkanauts crave the poll.

Monster Rain wrote:You heard it here, OP. Dakkanauts crave the poll.

Well pretre lets see that poll

I hate you, Milkman Tomb King.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There! Happy?

Sweet I already got two votes

whembly wrote:I'd be more interested in engaging a veteran GK player and ask what units/strategy/gear are sucessful against GK.

Here are 9 large blog articles on how to defeat GK
http://11thcompany.blogspot.com/


Automatically Appended Next Post:

wuestenfux wrote:Well, after battling GK a few times, twice in an RTT two days ago, I found that GK are rather scary. I mainly play mech Eldar. Psycannon can ruin my day if they target my Serpents and Dreadknights are not easy to stop with their teleporters and scout move thanks to grand strategy.

It appears that GK is the most powerful MEQ codex that appeared during the last decade. The only MEQ codex on par was the 3.5 ed CSM codex which I found was the best codex so far.

As a Mech'dar player you have one of the best match up against them too.

The trick is you need to take down the psydreads ASAP. The best solution to do this are suicide dragon squads and maybe a suicide warlock squad. Once their heavy weapons are gone, then you just stand back and plick away at them from over 24" away. A GK psycannon is only assault 2 if it moves, and its got a hard time vs AV 12 when it cannot rend.

With a farseer to shut down psychic powers, mech'dar are not suffering as badly as other armies.

Yeah, eldar in general are really rough for GKs for a variety of reasons, but runes of warding is among the biggest. Even something as benign as a wraithlord is kind of a huge pain in the ass to take out and GKs are not really any better off against harliquins, warwalkers, or wraithguard than any other MEQ. I run the razorspam list and its probably the second hardest matchup (after all foot marines, which is rarely ever seen) because fortitude is basically off the table, along with hammerhand. And in a mechdar showdown, razors lose badly to eldar grav tanks, especially if backed by prisms to drill the psyflemen most run. Suicide fire dragons is the best option, but when you have runes of warding suppression fire suddenly works again.

No Meltaguns is such a massive disadvantage that I seriously suspect people don't let them near actual mech armies.

People talking about Landraiders having them have no concept of opportunity cost.

Well the results of the poll so far indicate the audience as a majority see the codex as well designed for 5th edition. I will come back in a couple of days to check the results again. I don't think the percentages are going to change much as a whole.

Like anything, that can be misleading, though.

There are 7 options in the poll, and 73% of people chose the top 3 options. That the third is labelled "well designed for 5th edition" could just be people hesitating at voting for an option including the word "overpowered".

The reason I point this out is that, if they're not overpowered, one would think the word average could be applied... yet only 3 people (out of 92 thus far) voted for "average"... the 4th option, and the least voted upon of any.

Also, the other votes may need to be thrown out entirely- as they were for options such as "No. Just no." and something about Tomb Kings...

In other words, I put very little stock in this poll with how it is worded. I believe most gamers would say that grey knights are above average, but unfortunately that was not an option in the poll... there are a bunch of nonsense choices and no gradient between "well designed for 5th ed" and "overpowered".

I agree completely, I believe a sliding scale of 1 to 10 would be arguably best as it gives things a quantitative value rather then an abstract one.

Red Corsair wrote:I agree completely, I believe a sliding scale of 1 to 10 would be arguably best as it gives things a quantitative value rather then an abstract one.

You would need to accurately define what each end of the scale represents, as a 10 to some people would mean "Great book!" and to others would mean "Most overpowered in a decade"

All polls are flawed, the options really aren't that bad. Trying to decide the truth of any matter by public opinion is the real problem here. Just like anything else, the majority of respondents aren't in a position to answer on anything more then how they "feel" about it, which isn't exactly the metric of the century.

Fearspect wrote:No Meltaguns is such a massive disadvantage that I seriously suspect people don't let them near actual mech armies.

People talking about Landraiders having them have no concept of opportunity cost.

It's one of many options for them. They have the cheapest melta units in the game if they want them, and have access to melta in every FoC slot. Now, with GK's, you wouldn't take all of them just for the meltaweapons, but you'll likely include many of them incidentally for other reasons (e.g. Stormravens and Land Raiders) and they can take melta-weapons as options.

Measured against non-Imperial armies, in terms of total number of units and FoC slots that have access to meltaguns, Grey Knights compare very favorably, especially as many of the units in other armies that can take melta weapons are just as situational as the GK's options for them and many of them aren't exactly optimized tank hunting units either.

Grey Knights have...11 units that can take a melta weapon, Inquisitor Karamazov, Ordo Malleus Inquisitors, Ordo Xenos inquisitors, Ordo Hereticus Inquisitors, Hencmen Warbands, Stormraven Gunships, Dreadnoughts, Venerable Dreadnoughts, and all 3 Land Raider types. (potentially any FoC slot)

Necrons have...1 unit that can take a melta weapon, Triarch Stalkers. (1 FoC Slot: Elites)
Eldar have...4 units that can take meltaguns, Fire Dragons, Storm Guardians, Harlequins (6" range pistols) and Autarchs. (3 FoC slots, HQ, Elites, Troops)
Dark Eldar have...3 units that can take melta weaponry, Reavers, Scourges and Talos, and they're S6 Lance, meaning they are identical against AV14 targets and worse against everything else. (2 FoC Slots, Fast Attack and Heavy Support)
Tau have...6, Crisis Suits, Stealth Suits, Pirhanas, Shadowsun, Crisis Suit Commanders, and Crisis Suit Bodyguards (3 FoC slots, HQ, Elites, Fast Attack)
Daemons have...0
Tyranids have...0
Orks have...0

TL;DR, they still have a lot more melta access than many armies in the game, it's not exactly a crippling drawback for them.

In a discussion about the tournament worthiness of an army, I don't understand why you are bringing Stormravens and Land Raiders into the discussion as options.

Fearspect wrote:In a discussion about the tournament worthiness of an army, I don't understand why you are bringing Stormravens and Land Raiders into the discussion as options.

Why not? Both units are viable options. Several builds utilize both these units in the GK codex. I find it humorous that people still claim that GK have a lack of melta. People not taking them in favor of purifiers and psyfle dreads does not mean they are restricted. This just shows that people have a narrow scope as to what to field from this codex.